CVE-2025-35060VulnerabilityPublished 9 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-35060: Newforma Project Center · Cross-site Scripting

Affects Newforma Project CenterSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.1 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.1Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 11% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Passive
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: Passive: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires limited interaction by the targeted user with the vulnerable system and the attacker’s payload. These interactions would be considered involuntary and do not require that the user actively subvert protections built into the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 9 Oct 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-25.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Newforma Project Center	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations should implement the following specific mitigations: 1) Restrict or disable SVG file uploads within Newforma Project Center unless absolutely necessary; consider allowing only safer file formats. 2) Implement server-side sanitization of SVG files to remove or neutralize embedded scripts and potentially dangerous elements before storage or rendering. 3) Enforce strict Content Security Policies (CSP) on the web application to limit execution of inline scripts and restrict sources of executable content. 4) Monitor and audit file upload activities and user interactions for anomalous behavior indicative of exploitation attempts. 5) Educate users about the risks of interacting with untrusted files and encourage cautious behavior, especially on mobile devices. 6) Apply principle of least privilege for user accounts to minimize impact if credentials are compromised. 7) Engage with Newforma for timely patches or updates addressing this vulnerability and test them in controlled environments before deployment. 8) Use web application firewalls (WAF) with custom rules to detect and block malicious payloads in SVG uploads. 9) Regularly review and update mobile device security policies to ensure safe access to project management platforms. These measures, combined, will reduce the likelihood and impact of exploitation.

Description

CVE-2025-35060 is a medium-severity cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Newforma Project Center's Info Exchange feature. It allows a remote, authenticated attacker to upload SVG files containing malicious JavaScript, which can be executed when viewed on mobile browsers. The vulnerability arises from improper input neutralization during web page generation, specifically in handling SVG file uploads. Exploitation requires authentication and some user interaction to trigger the malicious payload. While no known exploits are currently reported in the wild, the vulnerability poses risks to confidentiality, integrity, and availability of user sessions and data. European organizations using Newforma Project Center, especially those in architecture, engineering, and construction sectors, should prioritize mitigation. Practical defenses include restricting SVG uploads, sanitizing SVG content, enforcing strict Content Security Policies, and monitoring user activity. Countries with significant adoption of Newforma products and critical infrastructure projects, such as Germany, the UK, France, and the Netherlands, are most likely to be affected. Given the medium CVSS score of 5.1, the threat requires attention but is not critical.

Impact

For European organizations, especially those in architecture, engineering, construction, and project management sectors that rely on Newforma Project Center, this vulnerability could lead to unauthorized access to sensitive project data, manipulation of project workflows, and compromise of user credentials. The XSS flaw can be exploited to execute malicious scripts that steal session tokens, redirect users to phishing sites, or perform unauthorized actions on behalf of authenticated users. This undermines confidentiality and integrity of project information and could disrupt availability if attackers inject disruptive scripts. Given the requirement for authentication and user interaction, the attack surface is somewhat limited but still significant in environments with multiple users and frequent file exchanges. The mobile-specific rendering aspect increases risk for users accessing the platform via smartphones or tablets, common in field operations. The vulnerability could also facilitate lateral movement within an organization's network if attackers leverage stolen credentials or session data. Regulatory compliance risks exist under GDPR if personal data is exposed or mishandled due to exploitation. Overall, the threat could damage organizational reputation, cause operational delays, and incur financial losses.

Summary

CVE-2025-35060 is a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability classified under CWE-79, affecting Newforma Project Center's Info Exchange (NIX) feature. The vulnerability specifically involves the 'Send a File Transfer' functionality, which permits authenticated remote users to upload SVG files. SVG files can embed JavaScript or other executable content, and due to insufficient input neutralization during web page generation, these scripts may be executed or rendered by web browsers, particularly when accessed via mobile user agents. This improper sanitization allows attackers to inject malicious scripts that can execute in the context of the victim's browser session, potentially leading to session hijacking, data theft, or unauthorized actions within the application. The vulnerability requires the attacker to be authenticated, and some user interaction is necessary to trigger the payload, such as viewing the malicious SVG file through the mobile interface. The CVSS 4.0 base score is 5.1, reflecting a medium severity level, with network attack vector, low attack complexity, no privileges required beyond authentication, and user interaction needed. No patches or known exploits are currently documented, but the risk remains significant due to the nature of XSS attacks and the sensitive project data managed by Newforma Project Center. The vulnerability affects all versions indicated as '0', suggesting either an unspecified or initial release version. The lack of patch links indicates that remediation may still be pending or in development. The vulnerability's impact is compounded by the use of mobile user agents, which may have different security controls or rendering behaviors compared to desktop browsers.

CWE-79Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #1OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Implementation · Architecture and Design
Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages.
Architecture and Design · Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XSS Using MIME Type Mismatch (opens in a new tab)
DOM-Based XSS (opens in a new tab)
Reflected XSS (opens in a new tab)
Stored XSS (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 17 Oct 2025, 05:19 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-79

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats